Kristol: Hersh Scaring People Away From ‘Limited and Credible Military Option Against Iran’
Kristol: Hersh Scaring People Away From ‘Limited and Credible Military Option Against Iran’
This morning on Fox News, Bill Kristol slammed Seymour Hersh’s article about plans being developed by the Bush administration to bomb Iran, possibly with nuclear weapons. Kristol called the article “bad reporting” that was intended to “scare people away from a much more limited and credible military option against Iran.” Kristol also suggested that the only alternative to a nuclear Iran was “military strikes.” Watch it:
Transcript:
KRISTOL: I think 60 percent of Americans are right. It’s not the UN’s fault Iran wants nuclear weapons. The current regime in Iran wants nuclear weapons. It’s not going to be deterred by little slaps on the wrist by the IAEA or probably even by sanctions by the UN Security Council which we probably will not get because of Russia and China. And therefore we’ll go and try to have sanctions with our allies against Iran. I’m not sure that will work either. I think we may, the only alternative may be a nuclear Iran or military strikes to take out their nuclear facilities
HOST: There’s a report you probably saw that Iran might try to launch terror attacks against US civilians on American soil if we were to take any military action. With that in mind, take a look at this new Fox News/Opinions Dynamics poll. It’s really quite stunning. If Iran backs terrorist attacks right here in the US, only 32 percent think we should respond with large aggressive military action. 30 percent think we should negotiate. What do you make of that after two wars, are Americans simply war weary and does that limit our options?
KRISTOL: No, Greg. I mean a third of Americans who are against, certainly, the war in Iraq, even before it began and probably are again - think war doesn’t solve problems and they’re going to be pretty consistently against military action. What’s striking there is that two-thirds of Americans basically say military action may be necessary. We should not be deterred by the threat of terrorist attacks. I mean, one thing people haven’t thought about is that if we have limited military strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, they could threaten terrorist attacks, but we would still have leverage on them. It’s not as if we, it’s not their turn. This isn’t a checkers game, you know. We would still have leverage in terms of really going after the regime itself. And I don’t know that it would be that easy for them to simply unleash terror against us to the degree they’re not already unleashing it against us.
HOST: Bill, Iran has reinforced its key nuclear sites at Natanz and Isfahan. And American military planners reportedly have advised that it will require nuclear penetrator munitions to take out some sites. Would that be crossing the line?
KRISTOL: Everyone would prefer not to do that, and I don’t think we’re going to do that. The military people I’ve talked to don’t believe that’s necessary. We don’t need to take out every scintilla of an Iranian nuclear plant. We need to disrupt their nuclear plans, set them back several years, buy some time for both diplomacy and possibly peaceful regime change in Iran. So no, I do not believe we will use nuclear weapons. I think that’s based on bad reporting by Seymour Hersh and the New Yorker, who wants to scare people away from a much more limited and credible military option against Iran.
HOST: Yeah. Bill Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard. Bill, thanks so much.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Yes, of course we can execute a limited military strike and it will end there. Just like Iraq ended when Bush declared mission accomlished. No unitended consequences whatsoever!
April 10th, 2006 at 12:10 pmLOL Hersh has gotten the rats like Kristol to admit that the Bush Regime plans on bombing Iran very soon, but Kristol is upset about the nuke plan being revealed, which could undermine the operation, so he attacks Hersh personally!
April 10th, 2006 at 12:16 pmI guess the Bushies have no idea how to implement a program based on diplomacy. Of course, their first step — to alienate much of the rest of the world by invading Iraq justified by a web of lies and deceit — is probably not the best way to build credibility.
April 10th, 2006 at 12:18 pmUnfortunately, one of the things about the “muscular” Republican foreign policy that appeals to too many white male voters is their willingness to use military hardware to “solve” their problems. Many of those voters don’t know anything more than what they have seen on Fox News and they are capable of mistaking action-adventure movies for documentaries.
So why build all these nukes if you can never use them? We got ‘em, they don’t. Let’s keep it that way.
April 10th, 2006 at 12:21 pmIt seems to me that the only ones that want war are the people that don’t have family in the military. It is the middle class and the poor that are going over to Iraq to fight this war. The congress and the Old Bushie admin. do not have their Sons or Daughters over in Iraq fighting this war. Why is this?
April 10th, 2006 at 12:21 pmSo now we know the view of the PNAC-
Most here know this- but check out who’s the chairman in case you don’t.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/aboutpnac.htm
A little more-
http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
April 10th, 2006 at 12:22 pmthe only thing that is important to kristolnacht is a new war
seems the one thing that folks can’t fathom, how their gubment will start and maintain wars to make a profit, as the money comes right out of our pockets.
we pay for the bombs, the people that have the stock from the companies that make bombs get rich
this is a problem, it’s solution will go a long way to preventing future “elective” wars for profit
April 10th, 2006 at 12:23 pmTo Kristol:
You cannot kiss my left cheek.
You cannot kiss my right cheek.
You can only kiss the brown starfish in the middle.
April 10th, 2006 at 12:26 pmWow. This administration loves to use the word “limited”, don’t they? First it’s wire taps, now bombing campaigns. I don’t think they really know the meaning of the word, do you?
April 10th, 2006 at 12:26 pmThis sick-bastard war monger of a hack-shill journalist is fast becoming Josef Goebbels.
Amazing how history turns the oppressed into the oppressor time and time again.
-GSD
April 10th, 2006 at 12:26 pm#9 - In Bush World “limited” means “unlimited.”
April 10th, 2006 at 12:28 pm4. Unfortunately, one of the things about the “muscular†Republican foreign policy that appeals to too many white male voters is their willingness to use military hardware to “solve†their problems.
This is nature’s way of culling out the weak, lessening the dead weight, and improving the species.
Make the white male voters fight.
I have no problem with them acting out their urges.
April 10th, 2006 at 12:29 pmThere is no such thing as a limited nuclear strike on any country.
And to use GWB’s favorite phrase, “The lessons learned” in Iraq are that there is no such thing as a limited ANY KIND of strike against Iran.
April 10th, 2006 at 12:31 pmKristol has no soul.
What exactly did Hersch do to “scare” people? He reported that it was being discussed. That’s what scared people, the fact that it’s being discussed. Not what Hersch said about it.
Idiot.
April 10th, 2006 at 12:31 pmKristol has no soul.
What exactly did Hersch do to “scare” people? He reported that it was being discussed. That’s what scared people, the fact that it’s being discussed. Not what Hersch said about it.
Idiot.
April 10th, 2006 at 12:31 pmThere should be a television channel that does a whole lot of pointing out what fox news is and does.
April 10th, 2006 at 12:33 pmIf there is any type of “strike” (nuclear or otherwise) necessary…
…it should be at the homes and offices of Bill Kristol, Brit Hume and all of the other criminal Bushite TRAITORS and propagandists…
…America must take back its media, its government, treasure, and its reputation for peace, honor and democracy…
…that Kristol, Hume and the Fox Propagandist TRAITORS and their gods Bushiva and L’il Dick have stolen from us…
April 10th, 2006 at 12:36 pmHopefully the “scared people” reside in the WH!
April 10th, 2006 at 12:37 pmIran will be Nuke no matter what,the pull of Control of the Next Great Oil Fields and Natural Resources is far to strong for bush and co to back away from.
Kristol,Liberman among others are zealots for israel and israel needs to be put on alert for their Nuclear harboring or war heads!
When is Israel going to be foced to declare its nuke program kristrol?
April 10th, 2006 at 12:41 pmi love how in every screenshot of kristol, he’s making the exact same xanax-coated, in-mid-sentence face. i guess the same person talkin the same crap over and over looks the same in every picture.
April 10th, 2006 at 12:43 pmThe Bush/Cheney plan for Iran is to attack them first with conventional weaponry bombs and missiles, but once Iran tries to defend themselves, George/Dick will claim that forced them to go nuclear on Iran > see they attack Iran and then use false justification for using nukes! Also remember that our military has developed the “MOAB” bomb that uses fuel oil with TNT and explodes like a small atomic bomb, so they can drop those and claim they did not nuke Iran!
Hersh has revealed their dirty plan to the world, so Kristol and the other criminal Neocons are pissed off that their new war on Iran might get aborted! Bush and Cheney must be impeached!
April 10th, 2006 at 12:44 pmJack Straw - British foreign secretary -
“The idea of a nuclear strike on Iran is completely nuts.”
Kristol’s upset people aren’t buying the Neocon war preamble .
He can suck my reality based %#@&.
April 10th, 2006 at 12:45 pmWingNuts are sooooo wacky.
KUDOs to Sy Hersh for smoking them out!!!
April 10th, 2006 at 12:47 pmKristol is just another 60’s rich kid who graduated in 1970 from The Collegiate School, an elite preparatory school for boys located in Manhattan then used a college deferment to get out of the draft during the Vietnam War. In 1973 he received a B.A. from Harvard University which just goes to show you education levels and intelligence levels do not go hand in hand.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but why is it that it is always the chickenhawks who always seem ready to go to war? I mean, anyone with a lick of sense or military experience would think of bringing a successful end to the two wars we are presently fighting in Afganistan and Iraq before we start a third front.
Of course, I’m just a dumb-assed redneck and don’t know jack shit compared to the likes of Billy boy.
April 10th, 2006 at 12:47 pmThe fricking SOB ,IT;S OK FOR HIM TO START WW III He does not have to fight it.
April 10th, 2006 at 12:53 pmIf he thinks $3.00 for gas is cheap , bomb Iran and we’ll see at least double that price .How nuts those bastards can get , how iresponsable for Fox to give platform to those bastards who should be incarcerateed..
Kristol has a “habit” of besmerching those who disagree with our current Regime. I’ll bet Crooks and Liars have in their archives something very like this on our Iraq incursion.
April 10th, 2006 at 12:58 pmIt’d be fun to replay it for old Bill and get his reaction.
Bill Crystal has been drinking too much of the administration’s kool-aid again. What fool in his right mind would think using nukes is good idea. We use never even threaten the use of Nukes. They have gotten that there is a mad man in North Korea, who might hear that and deside to use his weapons for a first strike, if he thinks we would use Nukes against him. I’m all for a military strike and I think we might just wait to long or not go far enough.
I’d not only attack those sites, but all command and control facilities to include government buildings, military bases, air fields including shooting down their Air Force aircraft, bridges, power stations, radio, and TV stations as well. I also think we should continue the strikes for a period of 3 to 6 months. My strategy would also include a total sea, aid, and land blockage of Iran to include oil exports. The third leg of my strategy is to ceize the oil fields with US troops and continue pumping oil and selling it for the Iranian people’s welfare and to keep us world supplies. The next reasaon for an aggressive attack is to eliminate the current leaders or at least destroy their ability to command and control their military. Only a sustained attack like the one I’m calling for will bring Iran back into compliance with international laws and insure they don’t go right back to or continued to pursue nuclear weapons.
April 10th, 2006 at 1:02 pmWell, he sure has confirmed for me that they’re planning to bomb Iran and also to use tactical nukes.
My God, what has this country become?
April 10th, 2006 at 1:03 pmPost 27 > Why do you want to bomb Iran? What have they done to America or to you? Iran is ZERO threat to the US and only a minor nuisance to Israel! Even if they had a few nukes > why would they use them? It would mean their total destruction to use a nuke on anyone! The US has about 10,000+ nuclear devices, so Iran would never attack US, or even Israel that has about 400 nuke bombs! Do NOT fall for the Neocon baloney that Iran is a threat!
April 10th, 2006 at 1:11 pmOk bill, here’s a nuke , now YOU go deliever it…..you want a nuke war don’t you, so GET GOING.
April 10th, 2006 at 1:17 pmBeamis lives in the path of the Bush administration’s upcoming march on Iran - the Nevada Test Site, home to the bomb test scheduled for June 2. He has some insights and concerns more immediate than those of us who live… outside the area of the dustup. Read his take here.
April 10th, 2006 at 1:18 pmDucktape, in answer to your question…….invaders, occupiers and terrorests……Blessings, we need them
April 10th, 2006 at 1:21 pmThe interesting question about Hersch’s story is where did he get his information. My guess is that he got it from the Pentagon. Even the military is scared of Bush and the neocons like Kristol. Kristol is just angry because they got called on it.
April 10th, 2006 at 1:23 pm#27, If you are serious then you are kuckoo for Coco Puffs. What you suggest would start world war three. Ah yes, how easily we would secure the oil fields and sell it to the Iranians. Yep, I’m sure they would just get in line to purchase oil from their new American masters. You think Iraq is a mess. Iran is waaaayyy bigger, more people, bigger Army. I’m not saying we couldn’t dust Iran, but what the hell is the point? At least our quagmires would all be connected geographically.
April 10th, 2006 at 1:26 pmIf Iran backs terrorist attacks right here in the US, only 32 percent think we should respond with large aggressive military action. 30 percent think we should negotiate. What do you make of that after two wars, are Americans simply war weary and does that limit our options?
KRISTOL: No, Greg. I mean a third of Americans who are against, certainly, the war in Iraq, even before it began and probably are again - think war doesn’t solve problems and they’re going to be pretty consistently against military action. What’s striking there is that two-thirds of Americans basically say military action may be necessary.
What an asshole!
He lumps the undecided in with the pro war idiots.
Yes - if a third of Americans are undicided, than two thirds are saying that force may be necessary - but by the same line of reasoning two thirds are also saying that force may not be necessary.
Why not just wait until they say something other than “Iran? What’s an Iran?” before we start tallying up their votes?
April 10th, 2006 at 1:27 pmwhere are the trolls? They should be all over this one…
April 10th, 2006 at 1:32 pmKindness - They are busy masterbating to the thought of a Nukular War. I’m sure they will chime in just as soon as they finish up.
April 10th, 2006 at 1:36 pmPost 36 the trolls have run for the hills to hide > the secret plan to nuke Iran got exposed, and their King George may finally get impeached! Hersh did a great service for America, because I believe that Bush/Cheney planned on bombing Iran just after Easter and before the Congress returned to DC on April 24th, so now their plan has been thwarted or delayed!
April 10th, 2006 at 1:37 pmLet me see if I have this right. The US has nuclear weapons. Iran doesn’t, but wants them. The US doesn’t want Iraq to have them because Iraq might use them irresponsibly. To keep Iran from getting them the US won’t rule out using nuclear weapons. And everyone knows the US now attacks preemptively. NO WONDER IRAN WANTS NUCLEAR WEAPONS!
Thanks to Bush’s lies, deception, irrational twists of logic, skewed vision and flat out incompetency, neither the US nor anyone else in the world knows what to believe or what not to believe — which makes him most destabilitzing factor in the world right now.
April 10th, 2006 at 1:51 pm#36 - kindness, they’re waiting for their talking points.
April 10th, 2006 at 1:54 pm#37 - Just saw your post. I’m laughing myself silly! :-D
April 10th, 2006 at 2:00 pmThe Shiites in Iraq will really love it when we bomb their fellow Shiites in Iran.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:05 pmI’m getting a little tired of Kristol The Hutt.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:07 pmI should damn well hope so. What the hell does Kristol think is going to happen in the wake of a nuclear attack on Iran? Are ANY of these people capable of thinking more than 1 step ahead?
April 10th, 2006 at 2:08 pmAmerica saddens me. I am hopeful, yet despondent.
Sometimes I daydream that Samuel Clemens appears, chomping his cigar to the tune of Staying Alive, and marches up the capitol steps with MLK, Hunter S. Thompson, and Smedley Butler in tow, prepared to kick ass and take names.
Then I awake to the pissy whining of some steak-stuffed red-faced silver-spooned xenophobe who is obsessed with dehumanizing some section of humanity on TV.
Punch clock. Eat. Sleep. Pray. Repeat.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:09 pmHersh is scaring people away a military option in Iran. Good!
April 10th, 2006 at 2:12 pmZookeeper - Thanks for the nod man!
It’s funny for the same reason it’s scary… might be true.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:12 pmNeocon theme song:
‘Oh, the war’s been good to me
And, so I thank the war
For giving me the things I need
Like the bombs that rain
And all my greed
The war’s been good to me’
These wars might as well be a Disney movie, ferkrissakes.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:14 pmWhat if military force is necessary?
Why does the left hate America so much? Why do you hate Bush more than you hate our enemies? Why do you wish death on conservatives?
It saddens me to see how crazy and insane the opposition has become. I pray for your bitter, hateful souls.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:18 pmI’m prayin’ for your sorry ass too, UR4.7.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:20 pm#36 - kindness, they’re waiting for their talking points.
You got that right….expect to hear a Hersh bashing session tonite on Brit Hume followed by O’Lielly. and Hannity, Rush will run with it tomorrow…
War is all the Rethugs have right now so they are gonna fight to paint anyone who thinks Iran is not an immediate threat as unpatriotic blah blah blah…..
April 10th, 2006 at 2:24 pmWhat if military force IS necessary? Huh?
Maybe we shouldn’t have wars of convenience because they devlue the discussion of the real necessity to maintain a strong military and meet real threats with effective force?
Don’t look at me for bitterness, look at the military. They have devoted their lives and careers to defending your lives and careers, and in return every conservative twit with enough money to buy a vote is playing armchair general. If you think I’m bitter, talk to an Army officer.
You, my friend, are separated from reality.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:24 pmI’m sure there would be no consequences to a pre-emptive strike. Well, maybe the troops in Iraq might be targets, but what does a fat, white chickenhawk who has no family stake in the outcome care?
wonder what stocks Mr. Kristol has in his portfolio? I imagine he is long on defense and oil stocks.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:25 pm#40
Such a BS theory isn’t worth responding to.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:26 pmWhy does the left hate America so much?
Not America - just ignorant fucks like you!
Why do you hate Bush more than you hate our enemies?
Bush is the enemy of all of humanity!
Why do you wish death on conservatives?
Because you backwards ass ignorant fucks are ruining the world!
It saddens me to see how crazy and insane the opposition has become.
I hope that it saddens you enough to off yourself!
I pray for your bitter, hateful souls.
Thanks man!
April 10th, 2006 at 2:28 pm#51 - Why did Democrats like Kerry and Hillary trash Bush over Iran? Why did they say he wasn’t doing enough to deal with the threat?
Thank God liberals aren’t in power. We’d be stuck talking about a bj if they were. Thank God we have President who cares about our country and has the courage to defend it.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:28 pmWhy do you hate Bush more than you hate our enemies?….I pray for your bitter, hateful souls.
Comment by Unemployment Rate
Thanks, UR, for the prayer. I feel much better all ready.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but maybe you ought to save your prayers for November. Or at least use them on Tom DeLay. Say, do you suppose any of those other convicts are poking Abramoff in the ass yet?
April 10th, 2006 at 2:30 pm#27 TimeForAChange - is as close to a troll as you get on this one.
“Only a sustained attack like the one I’m calling for will bring Iran back into compliance with international laws.”
One problem with that one “General A-hole.”
IRAN HAS NOT BROKEN INTERNATIONAL LAW!
Take a couple of minutes and figure out who has!
April 10th, 2006 at 2:34 pm#54 - In any case, thank you for responding.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:35 pm“We’d be stuck talking about a bj if they were. Comment by Unemployment Rate - 12%”
That’s true, because if a Democrat were in charge Osama would be in prison and the only thing Reichwingers like yourself would have to complain about was a blowjob. You sickos aren’t satisfied unless some sex act is at the center of your obsession with ‘liberals’. Maybe that’s why so many of you get caught as sex offenders.
And by the way the US’s REAL unemployment is HIGHER THAN FRANCE’s - IDIOT.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:36 pmZookeeper,
Tracy is a moron, he couldn’t respond to a REAL question if his life depended on it. The only thing BS is his claim to be an american - there’s nothing american about his values. Fascist/Nazi perhaps - american, nope.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:38 pmUR 4.7, the only reason that the unemployment rate is at 4.7% is because so many people ran out of benefits, and are no longer counted. Just as you should be…no longer counted. Take your talking points somewhere else.
Back on topic: this turn of events doesn’t surprise me, although it does scare the shit out of me. I have to assume that Bush wants to bring on Armageddon, that’s why he doesn’t care about starting WWIII. Boy, will he be surprised if there really is a Rapture and he and his buddies are “left behind.”
April 10th, 2006 at 2:39 pmFirst off, talking about blow jobs is a damn sight better then talking about WWIII, the second slowest economic recovery in American history, the absolutely huge foreign debt America owes to communist China or for that matter the Katrina disaster, so I am guessing you agree with us on the fact that a Democrat would have been a much better choice for President.
And secondly: You mean by abandoning his post during war time way back during Nam? Or maybe you mean by how he has spent more time on vacation,then any other president in US history, And don’t feed me that “He did the same work in Crawford” crap, because if Katrina showed anything, it was that when on Holiday, Bush was on holiday.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:42 pmRyan - actually, we had Osama and a Democrat turned him down according to the 9/11 commission. AND the unemployment is, in fact, 4.7% and will bottom out lower than Clinton’s 3.9% this economic cycle.
I pray liberal hatred subsides. I am scared what they might do to quash dissenting views - murder and mayhem come to mind.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:44 pmRyan - actually, we had Osama and a Democrat turned him down according to the 9/11 commission.
That’s because he was kicking it with Bush’s Home Boys the UAE royal family… would have been an international disaster Dummy.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:47 pm#65 - you are so ignorant. The UAE has the most freedoms of any other Arab country. They are an ally. Please stop it with your anti-Arab propoganda. It’s disgusting.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:49 pm#65, GWSC, you beat me to the punch. UR4.7% must have got the talking points, but not the background facts.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:50 pmI pray liberal hatred subsides. I am scared what they might do to quash dissenting views - murder and mayhem come to mind.
Yeah because the republicans are so leveled headed and fact oriented.
Lets talk conservative hatred, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’rielly, Sean Hannity etc, etc, etc, AD Nasuem.
Does anyone recall 8 years of the Clinton witch hunts? The attacks on John Kerry, or anyone else who dared to dissent? Swift boat vets? Hell look at the next post on this blog some republican talk show mofo talking about capping illegals as they cross the border.
Get over it Hate is not only a liberal issue. Get you head out of the sand, turn off the talk radio. Think critically, instead of being a ditto head.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:53 pmRyan - actually, we had Osama and a Democrat turned him down according to the 9/11 commission. AND the unemployment is, in fact, 4.7% and will bottom out lower than Clinton’s 3.9% this economic cycle.
Comment by Unemployment Rate
UR, actually if I wasn’t the gentleman I am, I would tell you that you are so full of shit. That story about Osama and Clinton letting him go is a myth. But the story about the administration and its Generals letting him escape from Tora Bora is certainly true. Remember that huge gaff, pal?
As for the Unemployment picture, see Jane in #62. Case closed. All those part-time service jobs with no benefits don’t count.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:55 pm#67 - you know nothing about facts, only fear. You use fear to damage Bush over the UAE. It is shameless liberal partisanship, but nothing new for the left. I’ll remember that when Bush makes another appointment to the Supreme Court this summer. Your hatefulness will be your undoing.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:56 pm#68 - the witch hunts against Clinton was payback for twelve years of witch hunts agaisnt Reagan, Bush, Bork and Thomas. AND Clinton was an easy target.
As for Kerry, you were the ones that attacked Bush’s guard record. Of course, we were going to point out that Kerry accused the troops of war crimes behind a camera. AND Kerry was one hateful liar. I am happy we destroyed him - he deserved it.
April 10th, 2006 at 2:59 pmLets deconstruct this real quick. First off you forgot to add Nixon. Nixon broke the law and was forced to resign. Reagan, I don’t really know what witch hunts against Regean, I don’t recall him ever going under oath, or having to testify to a grand jury. Bush 1, no grand jury either. Bork was a bad nomination as even many republicans have admitted.
I guess Clinton was an easy target, but why continue targetting him and Hillary?
As for Kerry, you were the ones that attacked Bush’s guard record. (sic) AND Kerry was one hateful liar. I am happy we destroyed him - he deserved it.
Yeah clearly no hate here. do you read what you post? are you self aware? do you realize the hate you spew?
You can go on about how the left just hates Bush as much as you want. the next election cycle is coming up, and the country doesn’t like or approve of the things Bush has done. Recent polls show Bush at 36% to 38%. That puts you squarley in the minority. Change is coming, and all that you wil be left with is your hate and anger.
April 10th, 2006 at 3:12 pmOkay 70:
You haven’t stated any facts here. All you have said is that the fact that Osama was with the UAE royal family at the time when Clinton could have captured him, doesn’t reflect well on the UAE and for some bizarre unexplained reason shouldn’t be mentioned. You don’t dispute the fact, you just go off the rails over the fact.
Hence, it is not Jane who lacks a grounding in reality, it is you.
April 10th, 2006 at 3:13 pm#70, let’s spell it out here in terms that you can understand. The US had Osama in their sights at one point, but, since he was hanging out with a member of the UAE royal family, apparently we didn’t want to piss the UAE off by assassinating one of their own. If you read what I said, there was nothing about Bush as regards the UAE. Try reading a bit more slowly.
April 10th, 2006 at 3:33 pmHow in God’s name does a guy like Kristol who has been so consistently wrong about nearly everything STILL be given the opportunity to speak in public forums as if he has a shred of credibility left?? At least Wolfowitz and Perleman et al have the decency to avoid the spotlight.
April 10th, 2006 at 3:37 pmthe witch hunts against Clinton was payback for twelve years of witch hunts agaisnt Reagan, Bush, Bork and Thomas. AND Clinton was an easy target.
Comment by Unemployment Rate - 4.7% — April 10, 2006 @ 2:59 pm
This sounds strangely like wwallace: No facts, no links, no sources, just half-truths, out-right lies, opinion (usually not based on reality), and inflammatory remarks.
My pet fish make more sense than this strange life form…
April 10th, 2006 at 3:38 pm#69
“That story about Osama and Clinton letting him go is a myth.”
BS! Why did Clinton only ask the Saudi’s? The fact that the Saudi’s refused to accept bin Laden’s extradition is irrelevant. There were other options that the Clinton administration refused to explore not to mention ACTUAL effort that was needed to be put forth other than just wanting to try him in a U.S. Court or worrying about avoiding controversy during an ELECTION year, i.e. 1996.
http://www.washtimes.com/ op-ed/ 20030901-102359-9067r.htm
http://www.infowars.com/ saved%20pages/ Prior_Knowledge/ Clinton_let_bin_laden.htm
http://houston.craigslist.org/pol/145680439.html
April 10th, 2006 at 3:56 pm#77 You have been fooled, once again. Poor sap. I bet you think Bush didn’t lie either. You just look foolish. Neoliberals are going bye bye. You tried, but failed. America sees that and you being here shows your desperation. Poor, poor ignorant sap.
April 10th, 2006 at 4:00 pmNeD, you only go for easy targets. That is because you are a puss. You are exactly what you hate. Sure puts you in tough position. No wonder you are full of hate. Oh well, we’ll still accept you here.
Thank a progressive for that every time you post.
April 10th, 2006 at 4:01 pm#66, NeD - calling others bigots doesn’t make you any less of one, just stupid for saying it. It’s in your nature, huh?
April 10th, 2006 at 4:05 pmWhy do you hate Bush more than you hate our enemies? Why do you wish death on conservatives?
Comment by Unemployment Rate #49
Unemployable Rat,
Take a moment to listen to yourself when you talk about your gods Bushiva and L’il Dick…
…tape record yourself or videotape you and your “conservative friends when you’re worshipping those lying, corrupt, mass murdering cowards in the White House…
…or READ some of the bullsh*t lies and propaganda you post on these fora…
…then shall the answers to your ??? be made clear…
…you (and ALL of your inbred kind) deserve nothing less than poverty, disease, suffering, calamity, tragedy, misfortune, grief and after you have experienced all of these (very slowly) ultimately death…
You are disgusting!
April 10th, 2006 at 4:19 pmTracy,
You forgot to include the National Enquirer in your ‘resource’ list. It’s about the only ‘tabloid’ you didn’t use to back up your ‘conspiracy theories’. You’re such a retard. You should take your unemployment wife who’s co-posting with you, and go have some sex that dare not speak its name, and leave the political discussions for those with a fully functional intellect, and resources that aren’t so pathetic.
April 10th, 2006 at 4:42 pm#78
“Neoliberals are going bye bye.”
You got that right!
BTW do you actually have a rebuttal to the fact that Clinton let bin Laden go?
April 10th, 2006 at 5:03 pm“BTW do you actually have a rebuttal to the fact that Clinton let bin Laden go?
Comment by Tracy ”
Yeah, to point out that it’s a ‘myth’ - just like most ‘claims’ you post from your conspiracy sites. You really need to get better resources - you look like a RETARD listing all of those tabloid links. Then again, you look like a RETARD even when you don’t - DOHHH!!!
April 10th, 2006 at 5:11 pm#82
National Enquirer? Speaking of which, I hope you don’t cite TP…a HUGE tabloid!
“You should take your unemployment wife who’s co-posting with you, and go have some sex that dare not speak its name, and leave the political discussions for those with a fully functional intellect, and resources that aren’t so pathetic.”
If you wish we can discuss your pussy comments about my wife face to face…little man. Name a place and time.
April 10th, 2006 at 5:14 pmTracy,
This LIE of yours was debunked months ago - just like most of the garbage you RECYCLE here. For a political party that’s anti-environment, you sure do recycle manure regularly.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200408120011
Just so you know butthead, they cite the 9/11 report - which DEBUNKS your lie. Wow, you reichwingers sure a stupid lot.
April 10th, 2006 at 5:16 pm“National Enquirer? Speaking of which, I hope you don’t cite TP…a HUGE tabloid! Tracy”
Actually the ‘tabloid’ refers to no fact checking, and not using authoritative or original sources. The sites you posted are notorious for ‘false reporting’, TP by contrast posts to, and links reliable and recognized resources.
You don’t do this, neither do those TABLOID sites you use. But being that you’re too stupid to know what a ‘reliable source’ is, just like you don’t know what ’science’ or ‘fact’ means - I’m not surprised you’re too stupid to look for, and identify the truth versus the myth.
You’re a moron - PERIOD.
April 10th, 2006 at 5:24 pm“f you wish we can discuss your pussy comments about my wife face to face…little man. Name a place and time. Comment by Tracy ”
Blustering pansy republicans aren’t my type - save that for your fellow man/women of the reichwing who actually will let you PRETEND to be masculine. You’re a scared retarded little PANSY, PERIOD.
April 10th, 2006 at 5:25 pmCome on Tracy - post your REAL IDENTITY AND contact information. I’m sure some of the Iraqi veterans who post on the site would LOVE to meet a pansy like yourself. But we both know you don’t have enough CONFIDENCE to post your contact information here. You’re just a chickenhawk coward - just like the rest of your reichwing PANSIES you worship at the alter of idiocy with.
April 10th, 2006 at 5:35 pmbig papa, lol
your killin’ me.
April 10th, 2006 at 5:36 pmPoor dumb Tracy, you need to keep up, YOU are the neoliberal. Your reign of terror is nearing an end. Don’t you smell it? It’s the faint waftings of freedoms, something you despise. Sorry, America wins and you will lose.
April 10th, 2006 at 5:47 pm#86
Mediamatter.org? Why are YOU citing a tabloid and a liberal biased site?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ ac2/ wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A61251-2001Oct2
http://www.nytimes.com/ 2005/ 08/ 17/ international/ asia/ 17osama.html?ex=1281931200&en=2b945263d3848ee1&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland
http://www.princeton.edu/ main/ news/ archive/ S01/ 18/ 20C20/ index.xml
If yours and other BS excuse is that Clinton couldn’t persuade Saudi Arabia or ANOTHER country to take bin Laden then that is as pathetic as the counter terrorism effort that Clinton put forth thru out the 1990s. Clinton wasn’t going to do ANYTHING that might jeprodized his re-election campaign in 1996.
April 10th, 2006 at 5:53 pm#71- My! Aren’t YOU the little Drama Queen ?!? What color is the sky in your world anyway? You know, you could probably get a job, writting Harlequin Romances. Your ability to suspend disbelief is crucial to the creation of a believable fantasy life, that you can lose yourself in. All of the best stories make you feel like you are a part of the story. But eventually you remember that none of it was real, even though you REALLY believed it, this time. You are lost inside YOUR story, but it is not a very pleasant one, is it? It sure must suck to be you.
April 10th, 2006 at 5:58 pm“Mediamatter.org? Why are YOU citing a tabloid and a liberal biased site? Tracy”
Please, they are the exact opposite of a tabloid - maybe that’s why you don’t recognize them as a resource. If you had actually READ the article, you’d see that it links GOVERNMENT RESOURCES that debunk your tripe. And yes, many of the sites you list did recycle the republican talking points, and false claims, but as the 9/11 commission pointed out - these were LIES!!!! Just like everything you recycle - RETARD BOY/GIRL.
And RETARD BOY - if you go to paragraph 6 of the NYTimes link you posted you’d find:
And in 1996 (when the declassified documents talk about this) is BEFORE Bin Laden had done any attacks on the US. The embassy bombings didn’t happen until 1998. What exactly would you have the US hold Bin Laden for criminally? See in this country people are innocent until proven guilty. Do you BELIEVE that we had enough PROOF to try Bin Laden for crimes he hadn’t yet committed? Are you going for the gypsie attack of guilty until proven innocent?
Wow, you sure are a STUPID SAD BAG OF ROCKS.
Read your own resources before you make a fool of yourself - or don’t. Either way, you sure do look like a FOOL!!!!!
And where’s that identification and contact information ChickenHawk? Too afraid to expose your true identity to the world? If you’re going to pick a fight - don’t prove to everyone what a COWARD you are dipwad.
April 10th, 2006 at 6:12 pmAnd Tracy, you forgot THIS little Gem in the Washington Post article YOU CITED.
So you believe the US should be in a habit of putting people in prison that they can’t legally jail them for? Guilty until proven innocent? You really are a NAZI aren’t you dipwad? Well, you’re in David Duke’s political party - it figures you’d be a NAZI.
April 10th, 2006 at 6:16 pm#94
“Please, they are the exact opposite of a tabloid - maybe that’s why you don’t recognize them as a resource.”
How are they different from a tabloid?
“And in 1996 (when the declassified documents talk about this) is BEFORE Bin Laden had done any attacks on the US.”
It’s been well documented that al Qaeda financed the 1993 WTC bombing.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/9126/#8
“the Sept. 11 commission concluded in one of its staff reports that it had “not found any reliable evidence to support the Sudanese claim.—
The 9/11 panel accepted the REVISED testimony that Clinton gave to the them. If you want to hear the original Clinton audio…
http://www.newsmax.com/audio/BILLVH.mp3
“See in this country people are innocent until proven guilty. Do you BELIEVE that we had enough PROOF to try Bin Laden for crimes he hadn’t yet committed?”
And you think that terroist attacks, like those on 9/11, the 1996 Embassy Bombings, or the 1993 WTC attacks for example, should be treated as a CRIMINAL matter? That is EXACTLY the way your impotent hero Clinton thought…so goes why the U.S. was attacked so many times during his tenure.
“And where’s that identification and contact information ChickenHawk? Too afraid to expose your true identity to the world? If you’re going to pick a fight - don’t prove to everyone what a COWARD you are dipwad.”
I asked you to name a time and place to meet, not for your contact information and yes I most definately picking a fight with you…little man. BTW where is your contact information?
April 10th, 2006 at 7:20 pmKristol advocates a military option in Iran — he admits it. He is redeeming himself in the White House, by attacking the messenger. What makes him think we can drop a few bombs (non-nuclear) in Iran and accomplish anything except more retaliatory attacks and more hatred for America.
April 10th, 2006 at 7:29 pmWhat do these guys smoke? They can’t even think diplomacy because the cowboy in the White House can’t do that — it’s too nuanced for him.
“How are they different from a tabloid?Tracy”
Your reichwing sources ARE tabloids - especially Newsmax, which I noticed you posted.
They don’t fact check. There are OBVIOUS errors in their stories. And they don’t cite their sources, and if they do, they’re other reichwing tabloid sites that all circle jerk (your favorite past time pansy boy?) each other with lies.
And you obviously DON’T read the resources you cite. As I CORRECTED YOU ABOVE, your own resources when you site MAINSTREAM ones contradict your own claims.
Your CFR article doesn’t make any claims to 1993 WTC attacks being FUNDED by Al Queda. All it says is that those involved with the attacks were ‘affiliated with’ Al Queda - which is a VERY loose term that can mean lots of things.
Were you ALWAYS so inept, or did you become that way to fit in as a republican troll?
“And you think that terroist attacks, like those on 9/11, the 1996 Embassy Bombings, or the 1993 WTC attacks for example, should be treated as a CRIMINAL matter? That is EXACTLY the way your impotent hero Clinton thought…so goes why the U.S. was attacked so many times during his tenure. Tracy”
The embassy bombings were in 1998 you RETARD, and the date you cited for obtaining Bin Laden were 1996. You’re as INEPT as this entire administration. No wonder you freaks can’t run a government - you’re all DUMB AS POSTS. As your article pointed out - the 1993 WTC attacks were from different groups, they were loosely affiliated with Al Queda, there was no proof of Al Queda’s involvement. In fact at the point of the 1993 attacks, these people were considered by intelligence to be FORMER MEMBERS of those groups.
So once again, you would prefer to use loose evidence of a possible connection to detain and possibly execute someone? Wow, you’re fulfilling the Nazi badge nicely.
“I asked you to name a time and place to meet, not for your contact information and yes I most definately picking a fight with you…little man. BTW where is your contact information? Comment by Tracy ”
I’m not the one picking the fight - you are. For someone who claims to be ‘tough’ and want to ‘fight’, you’re acting awfully cowardly about it. You COWARDS always make this sort of claim, but you’re always too much of a PANSY to do anything about it. It’s why you’re here with the 101 keyboard brigade instead of fighting in Iraq. You’re a COWARD, a LOSER, and a LIAR. And you’d never have the cajones to post your contact information and we both know it. Pansies like you always write checks with their mouths that their a$$e$ can’t cash.
The ‘lets meet’ always ends in a cowardly execuse by reichwingers. You guys are FAMOUS on the internet for this ploy - and we both know you’re a big wussie waste of time.
If you were serious about being ‘brave’, you’d post your real contact information and identity - but we both know you’re 100% COWARDLY PANSY and will never do that.
April 10th, 2006 at 8:05 pmHhhhMMMMMMMMMMM!!!! We’re using depleted uranium shells now. So if we up it a bit to just around a 20-40 megaton atom fucking bomb, then we’ll spot the terrorists when they run around at night. Their balls will glow in the dark.
April 10th, 2006 at 10:21 pmFuckin’ smart, I tell you.
#98
“There are OBVIOUS errors in their stories.”
Like what?
I posted an audio link in Clinton’s own words. Are you too much of an ostrich to listen to it?
“There are strong links. Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, the militant cleric convicted in the 1993 plot, once led an Egyptian group now affiliated with al-Qaeda; two of his sons are senior al-Qaeda officials. And Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, who was convicted of masterminding the 1993 attack, planned al-Qaeda’s foiled attack on American airliners over the Pacific Ocean. He is also the nephew of the former senior al-Qaeda terrorist Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who is now in U.S. custody.”
al Quada was directly involved. Case closed.
“The embassy bombings were in 1998 you RETARD, and the date you cited for obtaining Bin Laden were 1996″
That has nothing to do with the fact the you would rather treat terrorist attack like a criminal matter rather the an act of war.
“I’m not the one picking the fight - you are.”
I KNOW I am you little shit.
“For someone who claims to be ‘tough’ and want to ‘fight’, you’re acting awfully cowardly about it.”
How is giving you little candy ass the OPTION of a time and place cowardly?
“It’s why you’re here with the 101 keyboard brigade instead of fighting in Iraq.”
You are doing the same but not taking me up on my offer shows that YOU are the coward.
“And you’d never have the cajones to post your contact information and we both know it.”
Where is yours?
“Pansies like you always write checks with their mouths that their a$$e$ can’t cash.”
Take me up on my offer you little fuck.
Here I will help you out since you don’t have the guts to throw down. Meet me at the corner of Greenville Ave. and University Blvd. in Dallas, TX on Saturday April 22 @ 1 p.m. And a little advice….bring friends, you’ll need them.
April 10th, 2006 at 10:42 pmI am more worried about incoming. If W convinces the Russians and the Chinese that he is mad, then MAD will happen.
April 10th, 2006 at 10:44 pmRyan -
April 10th, 2006 at 11:55 pmTracy can’t buy beer, even in Dallas (underage) - it could go down to Crawford where the only requirement is being able to scale the bar stool.
“This paragraph says they had Al Queda ties, it did NOT say that Al Queda was involved in that bombing - PERIOD”
And this is inaccurate as well…
Ramzi Yousef was a member of Al-Qaida.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramzi_Yousef
Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is his uncle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Shaikh_Mohammed
“Someone who PRETENDS to pick a fight, but won’t even post is own name is hardly in a position to call someone else a CANDY ASS”
If you are who you say you are post your home address and phone number.
“LOTS of posters use their blog addresses and even real contact information”
OK so where is your real contact information (i.e. address and/or phone number ect…)
“But we BOTH KNOW, you’re too much of a coward to even post your real name and location - so why pretend you’d ever be man enough to show up in person.”
Why do I need to do that. I am going to give you yet another chance to either show up or not.
“Because we BOTH know you’re all talk - like ALL CONservatards. You’re just another CHICKENHAWK COWARD.”
I am the one laying down the gauntlet and you are all talk.
“Ah, so you plan to have a ‘gang’ fight - of course you do… It’s what COWARDS like you do…”
“The fact you’d even say bring your friends, shows you intend to do that yourself.”
Oh no this is going to be one on one.
I will give you another chance. What is your answer to my offer?
April 11th, 2006 at 12:28 am#104
If you wouldn’t have cowardly brought my wife into this exchange I wounldn’t think twice about you mealy little mouth and the free flow of useless and childish insults that you CONSTANTLY bestow on everyone you disagree with.
“Did your daddy ever tell you that only a PANSY feels obliged to FIGHT to prove he isn’t a PANSY?”
Have you ever uttered you BS insults to anyone face to face? Answer…NO. That is what I am offering you to do.
“Wow, you’re a REAL LOSER.”
Loser? I am not the one who has to constantly insult people they disagree with. BTW what is your occupation?
April 11th, 2006 at 12:37 amSloppy Joe’s on Duval St.; Sounds delicious.
April 11th, 2006 at 1:17 am#109
Key West? There isn’t anything to do in Key West except maybe fish and get drunk. Maybe that is why you asked me to meet you at a bar. You are in luck; however, it will require you to put out some effort. I just happen to be traveling to Panama City Beach on that same weekend on business. I will meet you at the same time and date at the Sun Spree Resort in the main lobby
11127 Front Beach Rd.
April 11th, 2006 at 10:14 amPanama City, FL USA 32407
Sun Spree Resort;Sounds exotic,I’m there.
April 11th, 2006 at 10:36 am#110
“Because someone is a MEMBER of an organization, does NOT make that organization materially responsible for an act.”
Yousef has already been convicted of the 1993 WTC bombing in 1997 and in prison in Colorado.
Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is a member of al Qaeda
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Shaikh_Mohammed
“The 9/11 Commission Report calls him “the principal architect of the 9/11 attacks…”
Haven’t you cited this report as gospel before?
“And Yousef denied it, and they had no PROOF of this, other than their belief that Yousef was a member of Al Queda.”
This link says that Yousef was a member of al Qaeda.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramzi_Yousef
April 11th, 2006 at 10:42 amBut we both know you’re ALL TALK, Chickenhawk.
Comment by Ryan Neat #109
Ryan,
Don’t waste your time on this “panty waste” T’Rashy…
…s’him got no balls nor brains…
…If s’him did shim’d be in Baghdad “fightin’ ‘em over there t’ keep from fightin’ ‘em over here”…
…worshipping cowards gives one a certain delusion of courage…
fu*k s’him…
April 11th, 2006 at 1:13 pmyour all as bad as Hitler.. there. that marks the end of this stupid, acrimonious thread.
April 11th, 2006 at 1:22 pmTracy,
I told you where and when - obviously you’re wife’s HONOR isn’t worth you being inconvenienced - so it’s as CHEAP as I said. Figures. We both know you’re all bluff…
If I’m going to travel, it’s going to be somewhere I want to go - PERIOD. I’m not defending anyone’s honor - but apparently you’re trying to do so in a way that’s ‘convenient’ and ‘easy’ for you. Figures - you run your wife’s honor like GW runs this country. Cheaply and without distinction.
And your last little YOUSEF rant just proved my point. The government proved Yousef was the mastermind, but not that he had done the job for Al Queda. You really are STUPID aren’t you? You’re like a bad king of the hill episode. Dale Dribble of the Texas dumba$$ dribbles.
April 11th, 2006 at 2:28 pm“If I’m going to travel, it’s going to be somewhere I want to go - PERIOD.”
Oh, so you are just lazy. That was already known.
“I told you where and when - obviously you’re wife’s HONOR isn’t worth you being inconvenienced - so it’s as CHEAP as I said”
Inconvenienced? You are the one who is not willing to put out some effort to meet me even LESS than half way. You are the the one who doesn’t want to be inconvenienced.
“I’m not defending anyone’s honor”
Even your own? I am defending my wife’s honor, question is are you man enough to defend your own.
“Because someone is a MEMBER of an organization, does NOT make that organization materially responsible for an act.â€
Oh, really so when an organization funnels money to an individual or small group or trains them, i.e. a “cell” to carry out a terrorist plot, that organization is not responsible? Well then under that asinine line of thought al Qaeda and bin Laden are not materially responsible for the 9/11 attacks. BTW you are now admitting that Yousef was a member of al Qaeda. Thanks.
“And your last little YOUSEF rant just proved my point. The government proved Yousef was the mastermind, but not that he had done the job for Al Queda.”
So since Yousef is a member of al Qaeda then who did he carry out the 1993 WTC attacks for?
April 11th, 2006 at 6:00 pm#118 - Tracy,
April 11th, 2006 at 9:57 pmClinton did try to retaliate for the embassy and WTC attacks, he missed the target (Osama) because of delayed intelligence and a bit of luck on Osama’s behalf. W tried to take out Saddam four times and missed on all four. W relied on manufactured intelligence. W launched ground forces in Afghanistan and pulled back at the edge of success in nailing Osama. W chose to ignore information passed on by the Clinton administration and failed to react to the 8/06/2001 advisory because he was on vacation and needed to clear brush that had been freshly planted by his White House staff. At least, W has about 23,000 copies of “My Pet Goat†to seed his presidential library.
#119
Clinton had eight years to take care of bin Laden.
April 12th, 2006 at 1:01 pmSCREW KRISTOL! HE IS ANOTHER PURELY EVIL PNAC GROUP, S.O.B. TRAITOR WHO PUTS ISRAEL BEFORE U.S.! NO,NO WAR OF ANY SORT ON IRAN WHO HAS THE RIGHT UNDER U.N. RULES TO HAVE NUCLEAR ENERGY! Plus the same Goddamn PURE EVIL PNAC GROUP who want to needlessly bomb Iran now, ENCOURAGED THEM TO GET NUCLEAR ENERGY BACK IN 1976, UNDER FORD! READ THIS SHEEP: http://www.teamliberty.net/id229.html, PLUS, READ THIS:
August 1, 2005 Issue
Copyright © 2005 The American Conservative
Deep Background
In Washington it is hardly a secret that the same people in and around the administration who brought you Iraq are preparing to do the same for Iran. The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney’s office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing—that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack—but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections.
I am Goddamn tired of our politicians in U.S. putting Israel FIRST BEFORE AMERICA’S SAFETY! And get a clue, sheep! Bush is in bed with Bin Laden,who used to work for CIA probably STILL does! And 9-11 was an inside job! PLease watch this video: http://video.google.com/ videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change, Bush and Clinton BOTH ARE TRAITORS AS ARE OTHERS IN OUR GOV’T! Bush was involved in 9-11 but Clinton helped broker the Dubai port deal, WITH KNOWN TERRORISTS, and Bush approved that too! Then READ THIS SHEEP: http://judicial-inc.biz/arab_port_deal.htm KRISTOL AND OTHERS IN OUR GOV’T HAVE DUAL CITIZENSHIP, BETWEEN U.S. AND ISRAEL WHERE DOES THEIR LOYALTY LIE? YOU CAN BET IT IS NOT WITH U.S.! JUST LOOK AT WHAT MIKE CHERTOFF DID DURING KATRINA!! NOTHING AND HIM AND BUSH LET THOSE CITIZENS DIE ON PURPOSE! Then read this also sheep: http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0202-32.htm AND BOTH CLINTON AND BUSH WERE F*CKING GIVEN $1MILLION DOLLARS FOR THEIR DAMN LIBRARIES BY NONE OTHER THEN THE UAE, WHICH FBI says harbor terrorists!
April 13th, 2006 at 9:38 pm#54 Comment by Unemployment Rate
“#51 - Why did Democrats like Kerry and Hillary trash Bush over Iran? Why did they say he wasn’t doing enough to deal with the threat? ”
Because the CIA said Iran was a threat, and Iraq wasn’t.
“Thank God liberals aren’t in power. We’d be stuck talking about a bj if they were. ”
Yes, there’d be so little terrorism , and the ecomony, and everything else would be so good that we’d have nothing more important to talk about. Howsad that would be. Instead terrorism is up 2000% ,$5 trillion in projected surplus became $8 trillion in projected debt, and on and on.
“Thank God we have President who cares about our country and has the courage to defend it. ”
If he did, he would have taken the proactive step of never having run in the first place.
SR
July 19th, 2006 at 4:56 pm#71 Comment by Unemployment Rate
“#68 - the witch hunts against Clinton was payback for twelve years of witch hunts agaisnt Reagan, Bush, Bork and Thomas. ”
Thomas who was a serial sexual harrasser who doesn’t believe in precedent
Bork who was a complete nutjob who wanted to do away with the Bill of Rights, and Reagan and Bush who - according the Senate Investigating Committee - committed an act of treason against the United States (Iran-Contra).
“AND Clinton was an easy target.”
Right, because a man who grew up poor, made his fortune by helping people and improved the lot of nearly everyone he came in contact with is an easy target. That is, If you’re willing to make up lies. Maybe you forget it was found he didn’t do anything wrong. (As opposed to Reagan and crew: 100 indicted vs one for Clinton -
Susan McDougall - and that only because she refused to lie on the witness stand.)
“As for Kerry, you were the ones that attacked Bush’s guard record.”
Well, we didn’t want a proven deserter in office. We’d rather have a war hero.
Silly us.
“Of course, we were going to point out that Kerry accused the troops of war crimes behind a camera.”
Which troops begged him to go before Congress to tell their (true) stories so they wouldn’t be forced at the point of a gun to keep doing heinous things.
” AND Kerry was one hateful liar. ”
Give one lie he told. What? You can’t? Hmm….
“I am happy we destroyed him - he deserved it. ”
Yes, for helping save the lives of tens of thousands of American troops and hundreds of thousands of innocent Vietnamese, Cambodian, and Laotian civilians,
taking the lead in shutting down Bush-connected terrorist-financing banks, improving
the lot of working-class people, the poor, disabledm and children, etc, I’m sure in your world he did deserve to be “destroyed”.
SR
July 19th, 2006 at 5:18 pm#119
“Clinton had eight years to take care of bin Laden.
Comment by Tracy — April 12, 2006 @ 1:01 pm”
Considering that according to all available intelligence, there was insufficient evidence to go after him even well into 1998. That leaves less than two years, during which Clinton had a specific unit, a multi-pronged military task , and hundreds of agents looking for him. OBL escaped by pure luck.
(Bush has had well over five years….)
In contrast, practically the first thing Bush did in office was to shut all these efforts down, and issue specific instructions to stop investigating all the bin Ladens.
He delibreately let OBL go at Tora Bora, and ceased the hunt for him after 1 month.
“I don’t care where he is - I’m really not that concerned about him”, he said. So much for justice for 3,000 dead Americans.
SR
July 19th, 2006 at 5:39 pmToo bad I missed the fight (that is, if Tracy actually ever showed up); I would have loved to see him arrested and jailed for starting a brawl in in front of the hotel’s security cameras (which is why , btw, the other guy suggested a bar, duh).
Wow, these wingnuts really aren’t very bright, are they?
(Then again, I guess if they were, they wouldn’t be wingnuts.)
SR
July 19th, 2006 at 5:57 pm